About your Search

20120701
20120731
STATION
CSPAN2 56
LANGUAGE
English 56
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)
or wkkene t o noxactru 'slly t thepe an george w. bush of ministration. cheneyumsfeld, the rivals colin powell spaleifrenc gseem ohe iof sto they shared some common traits and beliefs. all of them had backgrounds in the military of the pentagon s a t sta ste enhan hent fsstf as it was a jamie -- chaney and rumsfeld. greta have that cabinet with two former secretariesf defense. sredels. amwastbl fofoodthrl mias of supreme importance. in fact, the disagreements among them or how and when for ld u t uted ve bars or u s. immediately after obama's election in 2008 and decided no one to take aook get the democrats ov the same e. okscod me t0's thuge enay unlike t oba ainisio. nce97he rtd sssoo ba gngf t anti-war movement of the vietnam-era. it h far few peoe, rticularlyn the o mistonengo ef bro ttillion last secretary -- last defense secretary was a republican. sure enough when obama took offi hes feereobat o was befse cr cheth bleeding jobs. atl ri ais in hentlige cnityautop jobs in his administration. so you have a democ
forward including support for programs that were set up by president george w. bush. they have undermined the environmental protection agency, established by richard nixon, and its authority to hold polluters to account and they have threatened iconic places from the great lakes to the gulf of mexico, the appalachian mountains to the chesapeake bay turning away from the national wildlife preservation legacy this country has pursued for more than a century sins the presidency of theodore roosevelt. that is why we call this a political assault on the american environment. it is reckless, it is radical, it is relentless, it is wrong and it is time we stood up to turn this around. [applause] this assault is not about jobs as its proponents claim. it is about putting polluter profits first and putting the rest of us at risk. from the air we breathed the water we drink from the mountains to the sea. government regulations of all kinds account for far less than 1% of all major layoffs in the economy. we have economic data from the bureau of labor statistics that proves that. decades of data make
-one u. s. presidents combined from george washington to george w. bush, he has racked up more debt in 2-1/2 years as president barack obama racked up more deficits than george w. bush in all eight years combined and george w. bush was fighting two wars and barack obama had more deficits and two years than george bush did in eight years. he socialized health care which the congressional budget office says is going to sway 800,000 jobs but more importantly for young people for us it is going to raise our premiums because in obamacare it is tough to weigh a provision that says insurance companies can no longer very price according to one's age or health status. insurance companies look at us and see again healthy individual and say you got to pay the same rate as your parents and grandparents. a huge redistribution of wealth from young to old and the left celebrates it. youth unemployment at historic highs. you have almost double the national average with those 18 and older and you look at the key to unemployment. many of you are in this category if not all of you and in america right now
near. maybe george w. bush. how do we square this? they immediately put this guy in near grade category where as the voters are essentially saying he is eligible for rehire. his overall record which was highly successful. i would describe it as heroic. he made the agonizing decision to drop the atomic bomb. same million american lives. he presided over america's role in fostering the united nations. he was the president under containment which saved western europe from soviet westernism poised with 1 million troops. he fostered the marshall plan. he brought about the national security act of 1947 that created the defense department and the cia and other things. he successfully made the transition from a wartime economy to a peacetime economy, and he made the momentous decision to read about how he made the decision when all his advisers said, you cannot say berlin. you will have to give up on berlin. he made the decision for the berlin airlift. absolutely wrote. everything had described happened in his first term. his second term was really quite mediocre. he did not manage to maintain
can't get below that. i think maybe george w. bush at one point came close. so how do we square the historians immediately in your great category where is the voters were essentially saying he's ineligible for rehire? well, history is looking at the overall record, which is highly accessible. i would say her road trip you look at first term because he made the agonizing decision to save nearly american lines. he presided over america's role in fostering the united nations. he was the president under containment which saved western europe from soviet aggression also miss him that was poised with 1.3 million troops. he frosted the market plan, brought about the national security act of 1947 and created the defense department and other things. he successfully made it transition from the wartime economy and he made the momentous decision to read about how we made the decision and all the adviser said you can't say. you'll have to get country and give up on berlin. absolutely heroic. all that i just described happen in the first term. the second term was really quite mediocre. he did
the first 216 years of the republic, george h.w. bush and obama added 5 trillion to the blink of an eye. so as i was developing the essential arguments for the boat, it occurred to me that he's not just redistributing wealth here at home, although he is absolutely doing that. and the way he has done it is by attacking the four core pillars of the u.s. economy. at the industrial, financial set her, and urges that are in the health care set very. those are the four pillars that uphold the entire u.s. economy and they're all interrelated to everything else. from day one he very methodically and very deliberately went about taking down those pillars because they were built on the free market principle of capitalism and remaking non-ascii massive redistributive schemes. he's been more successful in some areas than others. will see that the supreme court does on thursday with obamacare. i happen to think it's grossly unconstitutional. but he went about it in a systematic way. think about it this way. any other american president would be flipping his lid over eight, nine, 10% unemployment because
will be rid of george w. bush are what get this economy going again. our first black president. hope and change was his way of ringing optimism to his site, to his ideology. we all know it is a sick ideology really destroying the country, but he was able to sell it because he did it with a smile and a dead as a happy idea what this cause. you can never do at this time. his record is so bad is going to run a campaign against governor romney because he has no choice and is going to be cometely 100% negative. this gives governor romney and all abuzz a huge opening to be the happy warriors. we've got to understand happy warriors believed that america can be saved and that is worth saving and we can do the mission must have an it's going to be hard. i read about in this book is going to be hard and require sacrifice because the kooks will not go down without a fight. we have to persevere and it will be painful and branching. look at what is happening in western europe after decades of socialism. it is wrenching and it will be wrenching here. the key to the happy warrior is to understand t
? yes, okay. when you have a chance of winning, if you are george w. bush, if you are bill clinton, if you are mitt romney, the trick is that you need for percent of the country to love you to get through your primary. the right 40 or the left 40 or the 30% -- the trick is when the primary occurs, when it without doing anything that makes it harder to get to 50. mitt romney was determined to do nothing to move farther to the right and necessary to get the nomination. unlike george w. bush in 2000, bill clinton in 1992, where governor carter in 1976, his challengers were on the right and not in the center. bill clinton did not have to move to the left to be people. george w. bush had challengers. john mccain, on the left of him. deep forbes decided to not be the right-wing menace. mitt romney, unlike many other candidates, which faced far more verlyn challengers sucking up delegates and growth in pockets, none of them could ever win by that. but they all did challenges and there were some weak planning that no one expected. i am certain that nobody expected they would have to come o
in the george w. bush administration. cheney, rumsfeld and colin powell and richard r. medish who had risen with them in sight of the republican party. despite all the differences among the members of the previous administration, they shared some common traits and beliefs. all of them had backgrounds in the military or in the pentagon and this was true of the secretary of state who had been the chairman of that joint chiefs of staff. richard r. medish as it was of cheney and rumsfeld. it's rare to have an administration with the former secretary of defense. and they also shared some common beliefs. america was unquestionably a force for good in the world. a military power was of supreme importance and in fact the disagreements among them were halgand win force should be used for the united states should be saved for the big war were used for house it was in iraq. immediately after obama's election in 2008i decided i wanted to take a look at the democrats over the same time period. many of my books have covered the same time period from the 60's through the present day. and i kind of come ac
and 1972. [laughter] >> yes. okay. when you have the chance of winning if you're george w. bush , if you're bill clinton, if your mitt romney, the trick is you need 40 percent of the country to lead you to get through your primary. the right 40 or the left 40 or the 30%. the trick is when the primary without doing things that make it harder to get to 50. mitt romney was determined to do nothing to move farther than the right and necessary. unlike george w. bush in 2000 bill clinton in 1992 or governor carter in 1996, his challengers were on the right not in the center. bill clinton did not have to move to left to be people. george w. bush had challengers. john mccain on the left of him. steve forbes decided to be haven not be the right wing minutes he had been. so mitt romney, unlike many other kennett's was faced with far more virulent challenges sucking out delegates in the votes and pockets. none of them could never win. they all did things that probably -- i'm not sure, but i suspect there was some week planning that nobody expected. i'm certain nobody expected it would have to come
. after george w. bush left office, the club had its protocols and traditions. he was off the grid and disappeared. he said the current president deserves my sound. it is a very classic decision. obviously his vice president did not take that approach. [laughter] when he finally broke the cover three weeks ago and made some very gently constructive criticism of obama's tax on energy policy, he said but, i don't believe our president, our country should criticize our president. the public role of the president supporting the current one continues. this is a great picture. >> this is an amazing moment. again, we argue about whether eisenhower does or not. johnson is the majority leader. still, a democrat and a republican. the night of the kennedy assassination, johnson is on the phone to eisenhower. he said i've needed you for longtime enemies you more than ever. the next day, eisenhower drives to the white house to see president johnson. he sees kennedy's body lying in state. and he goes to see johnson. he writes out in a legal pad and here's what you need to do. you need to call a
is a doofus, george w. bush , sarah palin, dan qyl 's t tca d thno's nrubau ruthnydy e either, but governor romney is someone who is so furious and tone and style and intellect in mission they can do that holeustihes isolal kler. he is not john mccn, god love him, and i respect mccain. ge h. bhbob dole, and he's not oves ta, d al t theeyunng the sort of old tired campaigns. they ran 20th century mcasyigns. aidunrabaantho rneotfeo that and all. there is no bigger political killer on the scene than barack obama. you he to send aolitic pol coranh llg y, gery heant.ife if he contends th presidency, and he will run and do everything he can to win this office. oba.s not afraid of barack 's afm. ng teally co oaniz sending buses -- [applause] yes. sendinbuses now ulece omand gate eyoavlr axd, tay ting of community organizing. this sort of master of modern day astroturf. he didn't know what to do. ydro uphett useo ihe iraccs ey'tw t ey. team romney is getting really good at i his ability to take out the other side in debate, if you wahreouatf athi a mas hesnaknyru es a ter seo aninn a. so i am all
rove was george w. bush's brain, then david axelrod is barack obama's homer. what i mean by that is that david axelrod is a brilliant creator, personal stories of politicians. when brock barack obama ran in 2008, he did not have a record to run on. but he didn't have to run on that. what he had was his personal story. the son of a black african and white middle american mother. a man who saw his identity and found it, he was raised by his saintly grandparents and so forth. this is a homeric story, if you will. homer was known for talking about a trip, and during the trip, coming to some inner understanding of oneself. this is a story that david axelrod passion for obama to run on. the problem is, in this day and age, this is the story we have been there and done and seen and we cannot do it again. he does not have a record of success with the economy. i don't think anybody would disagree with that. he can point to certain liberal causes, such as health care, but we see that in the polls, but that is not a popular thing to run on. what he has been running on instead of dav
of distinguished responsibilities in both the reagan and george h. w. bush, and george w. bush administrations, first as special assistant to the president and deputy to the chief of staff, and in the white house as assistant to the president for intergovernmental affairs. his many diplomatic posts have included ambassador to the united nations offices in geneva, system secretary of state for international organization affairs, and most recently, as president george w. bush's special envoy to sudan. he is also a longtime member and i think now vice chairman of the board of directors of the international republican institute. so, we are very glad to welcome both rich and michele to this podium. brookings prides itself on being a nonpartisan think-tank and it is in that context that we are hosting this event today. our moderator is a guest scholar at brookings and former chief diplomatic correspondent for cbs and nbc news, former anchor of the nbc "meet the press" program, and also most recently of the haunting legacy. marvin kalb and it's my pleasure to hand over the podium to you, marvin, to c
, previously he had a number of distinguished responsibilities in both the reagan, george h.w. bush and george w. bush administrations. first the special assistance to the president and deputy to the chief of staff and in the white house for intergovernmental affairs. as many diplomatic posts have included ambassador to the united nations in geneva, assistant secretary of state for international organization affairs and most recently as president george w. bush's national envoy to sudan. he is also a longtime member and i think now vice chairman of the tours at the international republican institute. so, we are very glad to welcome both rich and michelle to this podium. proteins prides itself as a nonpartisan think tank and in that context we are hosting this event today. our moderator is a guest scholar of brookings and chief quarters make respondent for cbs and nbc news, former anchor of the nbc "meet the press" program and also most recent lame as the hunting legacy, marvin powell. it's my pleasure to hand podium to you. >> thank you very much. i assume all of you are foreign policies and i
. ronald reagan has to don't engage her initiative. george h.w. bush said, clinton did. george w. bush and barack obama all day. and so, while i think there are some of my own personal views about how i thought president bush handled the situation, there's how he thinks american readers might disagree with, but their sinks in that readers would be surprised about in terms of a president bush sought in terms of diplomacy with north korea, which is not normally something they would associate with president bush's views on north korea. so that was a natural thing where i could add some pain on this that perhaps other authors have written on the topic would not be able to. >> host: you don't necessarily take an ideological giving your evaluation of the other administration's. do you do give of critical review of success and failures of other administrations in dealing with the issue. one of the the basic thesis of the book is north korea is the impossible state because no one inside has been power to overthrow it and no one on the outside cares enough to risk the cost of changing it. i wan
. in 2001, when president george w. bush decided to spend a large portion of the surpluses he inherited from president clinton to cut tax rates across the board, many democrats opposed it because the tax cuts were unfairly waited towards the highest-income americans. as a result of this opposition, republicans were forced to set the tax cuts to expire at the end of 2010. as 2010 drew to a close, president obama and many democrats in congress, including myself, supported extending the tax cuts for middle-class families but letting the lower rates on income above $200,000 for an individual and $250,000 for a family revert to the clinton-era levels, as was scheduled. senate republicans filibustered that effort, refusing to allow the middle class tax cut without a tax cut for america's wealthiest. not wanting tax rates to go up on middle-class families still struggling during the economy. the president and senate democrats reluctantly agreed to extend all of the tax cuts through this year. which brings us to now. once again these tax rates are set to expire. i would like to keep rates low for mi
. it is not angels vs. doubles but there is a difference. look after 2000 george w. bush's elected. after the most controversial election and 100 years, 36 days to decide, in a weekend position losing the popular vote to, it would be easy for democrats to stop from the beginning damage the weekend presidency but the first thing he pushed to the initiatives. no child left behind and tax cuts. that moved through in a mottled bipartisan fashion coming from miller and kennedy. you could say they like the policy but in doing so they gave legitimacy to bush and made the presidency stronger. it enabled the tax cuts to go through. then we had 9/11. some was controversial but almost unanimous support then you move to the t.a.r.p rejected by republicans and democrats saved the bacon. first president came in without great momentum from clinton and 1993. every republican votes that economic plan then a series of programs including health care with a conscious effort he could not get what he wanted. he could not keep the democrats together but a significant difference then move up at 2009. a president elected
on the programs many of them went to washington with george w. bush. one of them became the lead negotiator on the no child left behind bill. became the lobbiest for peerson the large testing corporation. about the charter school part of the whole deal. i talk to the people who negotiated the bill on the charter schools. nobody ever thought there was going to be a private sector involvement in the charleser -- charter school movement. everybody inhavingsed nonprofits would come in and take over a few schools and it would be a good way to innovate. nobody said internet schooling run bay private corporation who sets an anchor at some on secure school district in tennessee and announces it's a real public school. the amount of 0 private money -- that's going to the public school system is one the biggest consequences of no child left behind. it was something that the people at least in congress who put it together had no thought about. it was not in their picture at all. >> it all comes out of texas? >> yes, it all came out of texas. when you started the book how much time had you spent in tex
in the political or philosophical soulmate, fellow social democrat. george w. bush was the president out of the nightmares. barack obama is the president. they say if the nobel committee could design the president from scratching the turnout a lot like barack obama. c. was a bit of a natural. it was a way of saying, from their point of view, saying ding the witch is dead here bright and george w. bush is no longer in the office. he's a new crime of placing a new day. .. that's exactly right. he county use a work -- he said it is a war that is winding down. he defended the afghan war quite strongly and he also said that security of europe have been supported by the blooded american soldier. things like that george martial like things. this one was more hawkish, that's true. >> host: we're coming close to the end, is peace a good idea? did you come away from the book thinking that peace prize makes sense that if it went away tomorrow -- [inaudible] >> guest: it's an important question and i force myself to answer in the yards ward of my -- afterward in my book. i hope there's information i
be >>ch vey chk happened two or three weeks ago. i just have to bring this p. after george w. bush left offic the club has its protocols and tradnsre wt of thrriddees il, h cic g o. virentcn ttt approach. [laughter] but when he finally broke cover ge ucveti weeks g n n x en pcter enr hbt coy ldticizeour president said that the public role of suppoing the current ecnin >>d tsis ang ag e lhoh about whether eisenher counts as a tean, and two men who had worked closely with eisenhower's presidenand johnson as majorityedr. l,e bl arumo. asinn,nss he ne yoron time. i need you more than evr now. the next morning eisenhower kicked in his car and tries to he es edyboy lyhe se le a. ond it's got a joint session of congress and here is that you need to say because the world is tching. the country is traumatized. one wonders what is going to hiasev yeeo thpotoh ug nnsda. key'enda was stalled in congressor not going anywhere. eisenhower ufficing him to ush it through. thiss not becau eiseower s ed ga. iss ciew evt mt t tredases o ilan continuity. throughout johnson's presidency, eisenhower placs
george w. bush lef oficethub has rols trioe lyt thridsed n e a cut est rv sceic ass thing to do. his vice president can take that approach. [laughter] but when he finally broke cover about two ekoai' lycntrirismf tad gyli f nt oo esid i n'lie our president, our country should criticize our president said that the public role of supporting theren e ots. ai nzi me n,yes although we argu about whether eiseower counts as a texan and two men who had woed closely with senher est jon jo e ilrupuan t deat e t key' ssiooh i t oneenhower and as i needed you for a long time. i need you more than ever now. the next morning eiseer edhirndrito ys te e ou jon. kne ngn at riou lan a l pad. it's got a joint session of congss and here is that you need to say because the world is watching. e coy israize e eratgoto enn b des nd omto hi r r usro key' agenda. kennedy's agenda was stalled in congress for not going anywhere. eisenhower sufficing him to push tr thnoteceiow kennsaed thae hoer li aisenat unne w mge stability and continuity. throughou
carter, president reagan, president george h.w. bush, president clinton, president george w. bush. none of these presidents were treated like this, none of them were by either republicans or democrats. somehow this president is considered different. we have seen everyone from chief justice john roberts who was appointed by a republican president to the nonpartisan american bar association urging the senate to vote on qualified judicial nominees. they are able to administer justice for the american public. sadly, republicans insist on being the party of no. but the american people and the overburdened federal courts need qualified justices to administer justice in our federal courts, not the perpetuation of extended numerous vacancies. we extend the number of vacancies even as the population of this country increases. today, vacancies on the federal courts are more than two and a half times as many as they were on this day during the first term of president bush. today there are still 78 vacancies. there have been -- because of the delays caused by republicans, there has actually been an
george h.w. bush was president, when bill clinton was president, when george w. bush was president, and then look what it is. what is so different about this president that his judicial nominees are treated so differently than all the presidents before him, republicans or democrats alike? it shows the nominees had to wait before the senate, skyrocketed why 18 days for president bush's nominees to 132 days for president obama's. those interested in a tennessee nominee will remember how hard we had to work for almost ten months even though we had the strong support of senator alexander and senator corker to get senators to consider the nomination of a judge to the sixth circuit. republican senators tried to take credit for the senate having reached what they regard as their quota for circuit nominations this year, that they should remember the senate would not even have had an up-or-down vote on three of the five of them without the majority leader first having to file for cloture to overcome republican blocks. the senate has yet to vote on a single circuit court nominee nominated by
george h. w. bush sent a monthly newsletters -- they are not monthly. he offered them and all but one turned them down. a lot of people that used to be president wants get away a little bit. they've had enough of that secure world stuff. and i gave them up -- about life that life up for something better and different. .. >> we are about out of time. just on behalf of everyone here, the reagan library and the foundation, mike and nancy, i just want to say thank you so much for coming, it was just fascinating. we're so happy that you're here. >> thank you. ms. . [applause] >> you're watching booktv on c-span2, 48 hours of nonfiction authors and books every weekend. congressional scholars thomas mann and norman ornstein examine partisan politics in the u.s. government. they contend the level of hyperpartisanship has resulted in a disfunctional political process that's marked by adherence to political party platforms above all else. this is about an hour and a half. >> i think we are, um, i think we're ready to begin. um, i'm e.j. dionne, senior fellow here at brookings. i moderat
clinton handed president george w. bush a record surplus. so the only time in the last 30 years in which we actually had the budget in balance was after we raised taxes on those at the top, the very level we're talking about now. between 1993 and 2001, this country created an unprecedented number of jobs -- 22.7 million net -- and did so while benefiting everyone up and down the economic ladder. not every individual but every quartile. there was economic growth in every quartile. we witnessed a decrease in the number of americans in poverty and we saw the creations of more millionaires and billionaires than ever before. president clinton's deficit-reduction plan not only reduced the deficit as planned, it eliminated it entirely. so not only did we create all that prosperity, president clinton then handed off a record surplus. i think it needs to be said. he handed off a record surplus to incoming president george w. bush. in fact, when president bush took office, we were on track to completely pay off our national debt with $5 trillion of surpluses projected over the next ten years. in o
and expanded by president george w. bush, a conservative republican, and which includes scientists at nasa, e.p.a., the department of defense, the department of agriculture, the department of energy, the state department, the department of health, the department of transportation, commerce, and interior, what they have said -- and i quote -- "global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced." end of quote. senator inhofe has said, global warming is a hoax, but the global change research program, which brings together many departments of the united states government, they say, and i quote, "global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced." understand of quote. -- end of quote. mr. president, our national academy of sciences joined with academies in brazil, canada, china, france, germany, india, italy, japan, mexico, russia, south africa, and the united kingdom. they came together to say, and i quote, "the need for urgent action to address climate change is now indisputable, end of quote. senator inhofe, global warming is a hoax. academies of science all over the world state,
to the same policies of george w. bush. remember when george w. bush became president, we had surpluses as far as the eye could see. then he gave these tax breaks to the top 1%. and, by the way, this $160,000, that's the millionaire tax break. they want to give tax breaks to the multimillionaires, to the billionaires, to the multibillionaires. they put no cap on the tax cut whatsoever. you can earn $100 billion, they want to give you a tax break. and there's a cost. there's a cost to the treasury. there's a cost to the debt. there's a cost to the deficit. there's a cost to fairness. there is a cost to the middle class. so i think the american people have weighed in on this one, and they believe that to give a tax break to the first $250,000 of everybody's income is fair, because then the people above that can pay a little more, the same rates they paid when bill clinton was president, and we need to go back to those days when we created 23 million jobs and when we not only balanced the budget, but we created surpluses as far as the eye can see. the question is, madam president, who are you fig
served with: president ford, president carter, president reagan, president george h.w. bush, president clinton, president george w. bush. somehow we have a different standard for president obama. do they really want to establish this as being the standard? do they not think that someday there may be a republican president and know that that's the standard that they want? it would happen there. during the past five presidential election years, senate democrats have never denied an up-or-down vote to any circuit court nominee of a republican president who received bipartisan support in the judiciary committee. that's 20 years, five presidential election years. during the last 20 years only four circuit nominees reported the bipartisan support have been denied an up-or-down vote by the senate. all four were nominated by president clinton and blocked by senate republicans. this entire year the senate has yet to vote on a single circuit court nominee who was nominated by president obama this year. since 1980, the only presidential election year in which there were no circuit nominees confir
in the entire republican party today. anta sntfoay n. paopivwreuli the george w. bush white house. saying that rush limbaugh is, in fact, a feared powerbrokers rout t rubn y. upby fthandr heide gotoe coge made her a slut and a prostitute. he said she was having so much sex the she eeds a whole lot of contcepon a joins other pe pe ay i nkao that. mighty rush limbaugh doesn't seem to understand the birth control pill is not likeviagra. [laughter] [aus do t abi ol llt re in sex like -- oh, never mind. sandra flukewas not cowed by aus he- asinn. f ut h ppit ppen. women and men around the country were disgusted by libaugh. and in short order he los nearly 100% of his national [cs seiss. asllfyin in honoring this amazing champion, this role model, now 12an o ore. hean pau >> thank you so much for that, that very warm and lively wee. lv ki t ful noingtes staying quiet during comments, excellent. so i have to say thank you so very much to terry, and to all rni oat oento n.o.w. f wa,b s t els aan f urad oelawmn o sto follow a good mode because i, like i'm sur every young feminists in this coun
. during the administration of george w. bush, the department of education published a highly respected study on tuition price increases and what caused them. if i'm the primary driver of tuition price increases in public institutions were over three quarters have earned a graduate student students attend college is a change in state funding i states invest less money in higher education institutions respond by raising prices. the study found no relationship between the availability of federal and state grants and the ensuing tuition price increases in either public or private not-for-profit institutions. institutions raise prices have an obligation to ensure that they increase their own financially programs to hold dunes. for example, last year our state cut michigan state university's appropriation by 15% on our board raise tuition 6.9% to compensate in part for these cuts. but the board also increased our own institutional grants eight by 10% with 83% of these great dollars for students with financial needs. this is an example of what institutions need to do with their own financiall
that both governor reagan and george h. w. bush who enlisted on pearl harbor day in thevy,a-ph54 conversation on restitution and apology to the americans who were herded into concentration camps during world wa th spewhs frs hayf i wihewnor in algeria. algeria is a very special case. algeria was not overseas. it waslly artmt of nodyt biffce th u1 io ros covo and 3 million berbers in algeria who couldn't. enly ethasylt icsov30a tasabt liberty were phot list noncitizens. that led to an eight year very bloody civil warndazy he de t ae e in bolrs e onrtgi e not talk about repentance in apologies. he said that does not go for relations between states. thges l, ink itas jt fthhe e skifatt epncrh happened having been promised and never got it. that is a general problem of nations, not justthe ch at t hthme led aia prm t wecin a korea,but that is the dark side and that is part of tisnfuokre trying to address. congratulations. the writing and that beautiful the beautiful poetry and the rechng tsut canstths.gm would you consider adding a 12thanwhhdingor send eerl mk stitr ruto dreis yh
in history to the biggest surplus in history. president clinton handed president george w. bush a record surplus. the only time in the last 30 years in which we actually had the budget in balance was after we raised taxes on those at the very top. the very level we are talking about now. between 1993, and 2001 this country created an unprecedented number of jobs, 22.7 million net. and did so while benefiting everyone up and down the economic ladder. not every individual but every quarter. economic growth in every quarter. we witnessed a decrease in the number of americans in poverty and we saw the creation of more millionaires and billionaires than ever before. president clinton's deficit reduction plan not only reduced the deficit but eliminated entirely. not only did we create that prosperity but president clinton handed off a record surplus. it needs to be said and handed off a record surplus to incoming president george w. bush. in fact when president bush took office we are on track to complete a often national debt. with $5 trillion of surpluses projected in the next ten years. and
with precision what the effect of advertising is. and the person who bought george w. bush's ads in 2000 always used to say with a big smile on his face that it was the most efficient ad buy in history in florida. he didn't waste a single dollar on florida. now, obviously, with a big smile on his face and joking. what he meant was a little too close for comfort for the bush people, but if you're looking at it as a complete economic efficiency, they didn't waste any money in florida because they won by 530 votes, whatever it was. anything they would have spent more than that would be a waste. but they, obviously, don't think like that. they're obviously not trying to get efficiency in that particular way. but advertising very, very much matters at the margin. i mean, we look at the 2000 election, phenomenally close. the 2004 election, also, phenomenally close. 70,000 votes go the other way in ohio, and we're talking about president john kerry. 2002, big republican victory taking back the u.s. senate, very narrow victories in minnesota and missouri. 2006, 2008, 2010, swing elections, and advertis
for george w. bush. and i said, why? he said, i trust him. now, a month later when americans cast their vote, i realized what had happened, which is that a lot of people were voting based on that. even though it may not have seemed obvious to us what their interests were, these people were thinking about this in a more fundamental way. and it reminded me that when you go and you talk to voters, all they want to know is you're going to speak to them and you're going to speak for them, and whoever wins this election is going to be the one that makes that case the best. we occasionally onthe "newshour" go out around the country and do spotlight cities where we go to towns and we sit people down and ask them to talk to each other. you know, we live in a world of silo politics where people watch one cable network or the other, and they only listen to people they already agree with. we get them all in one room. and in this case we were in the middle of the health care debate, and we were in tampa, florida, and there were people arguing with each other about what their meaning and understanding of
. but george w. bush was my president and i never voted for him. but ronald reagan was my president. and i degreed with him most of him but george h. w. bush was my president. i'm saddened by the fact that we've reach the point we don't have one president who represents all of us. i think we should get beyond that kind of rhetoric and this bill to talk about what matters in this country which is jobs, as you said. >> being amazed of how much congressman fox and i have in common. actually, i have been reading 1984 rather recently. i think the thing that bhotterses me about what she said is the notion of freedom, in other words my idea of freedom is freedom of speech, freedom of religious. it's not the freedom not to have health care. and the problem is, i really look at it from a responsibility point of view, which is what the republicans often talk about. in other words, it's not fair if you will, that people not take responsibility for their own lives. and why should some of us be paying these large premiums and bills for people who don't decide to have health care? and i also, health ins
security who served under president george w. bush, agree. they and many other officials have joined current secretary of homeland security, janet nap, the current -- janet napolitano, and keith alexander and others in warning as follows "the cyber threat is imminent to america. it poses as serious a challenge to our national security as the introduction of nuclear weapons in the global debate 60 years ago." the experts are sounding the alarm, calling us to take action now. to prevent a catastrophic cyber attack that could cripple our nation's economy, cause widespread loss of life, sadly, send our economy into free fall. when the cybersecurity act of 2012 comes up for a vote the senate will have an opportunity to take action on this critical bill that will enhance our national security. in light of these warnings from the experts, the least we can do in the senate is to vote to open the debate on this critically important bill. i want thank its sponsors, senator lieberman, chairman of the committee, senator collins, the ranking member, senator feinstein on the intelligence committee
was a major initiative with george w. bush's administration said we would invest in those countries that has demonstrated that they are committed to the rule of law they are going to end corruption and had a sensible program to use this money but people are wasting their money in the heck with that. we don't deserve -- the american people shouldn't expect that. >> let me do what i enjoy doing so much to put you on the spot little bit. >> your secretary of state today. we have a fiscal cliff that we keep hearing about that we are facing. we may have sequestration of our military. we may have another downgrade. who knows where this is going to go. but you have to go up on the hill and make the case for dillinger this, you are for spending more. how would you do that today? >> i think i would make very clear that the security of the united states depends on the fact of lust having friends around the world and countries that we're people are able to live a decent life and where in fact there is not an environment that terrorists can take it vantage of. there is no direct line between poverty and
to say you know, george w. bush had when he launched the search and where his most inner circle everyone except him would -- it but i don't think he will. i think the only way the narrative changes is if the fall of assad does not happen and then what you do see is not 20,000 people dead but 100,000 people dead. i think every 10,000 increments of slaughter you might say diminishes that narrative. so i don't know where that line is where suddenly that is not a narrative that you want to start out any more. but i suspect you know, somewhere between 10,200,000 people today. so wherever that line is, think that is where you are no longer going to use it. now you could still use the argument and you hear that argument more often on the republican side which is just sort of let them all slaughter each other, and without a great consideration of the strategic calculations in the middle east because it's sort of like the middle east, just go away. so, i think that is also a pretty powerful again, i would emphasize -- emphasize if you had to write now put your finger on something that would chang
.c., and then was assistant attorney general for national securit. s. mleref osffdiretor rert ths resident george w. bush's homeland security adviser. he received his undergraduate degree from the university of virginia and his law degree from the university of california at berkeley. profsoof er sosstan ivtyoo l. before coming to george mason, sales was deputy assistant secretary for policy development in the u.s. department of homeland security. he previously served as counsel and senior counsel in the ofce ealpolic at u rtut. he was the john m. olin llow at georgetown university law center in 2005-2006. come 2003-2005, he practiced at the washington, d.c. law rmo wiley d essaclfoe honorable david d. sentelle of the u.s. court of appeals for the d.c. circuit. he received his undergraduate degree from miami university and his jdfrom do. colonel ken alla is a mmento o forign pol d ctyises fomore than a decade he was a featured military analyst on nbc news, msnbc and cnbc. in 2006, he joned the faculty of unirsity of exs n nia eciv deinsnior lecturer and management. his military career included overseas
a fair share. we will find out. this is not a new story. in 2001, when president george w. bush decided to spend a large portion of the surpluses he inherited from president clinton to cut tax rates across the board, many democrats opposed it because the tax cuts were unfairly waited towards the highest-income americans. as a result of this opposition, republicans were forced to set the tax cuts to expire at the end of 2010. as 2010 drew to a close, president obama and many democrats in congress, including myself, supported extending the tax cuts for middle-class families but letting the lower rates on income above $200,000 for an individual and $250,000 for a family revert to the clinton-era levels, as was scheduled. senate republicans filibustered that effort, refusing to allow the middle class tax cut without a tax cut for america's wealthiest. not wanting tax rates to go up on middle-class families still struggling during the economy. the president and senate democrats reluctantly agreed to extend all of the tax cuts through this year. which brings us to now. once again these tax ra
inaghananb hereesberh caalfo04t mornt n20t george w. bush administration had used drums to a lodge airborne attacks on suspected terrorists and paxton. when you mbn assoatok i09 nr r thdulium m e ainstonus as a matter of policy to officially acknowledge the cia's drone attacks. but in the days following a big t, ynedom a an of videeo ike a rainbow, remarkable atmospheric happening. these drone attacks have become the centerpiece of obama's recalibrationo ma' di c t hmvif w e aditioh ten li aes in shamsi. quote, tht base is neither but vacated nor been vacad, was the anonymous but official word from washington. with a mexican sndf i chn. 'swe abtrd vi llemi wthior a non-peace. you forget about, you know, u whoudiutl t'ei. anyway, this tiny forgotten strip of land that held the airbase in shamsi, it turned ut it did not actually belogto st tohheni sige v at0eareleri ocan a rihi between the two countries. baluchistan, aside from being full of spectacular garden of the natural wonders and this is most be among the most o the pl o, ase t fewn rudste bud b iig em among hunters from the united
. in 2001 when president george w. bush decided to spend a large portion of the surpluses he inherited from president clinton to cut tax rates across the board many democrats opposed it because the tax cuts were unfairly waited towards the highest-income americans. as a result of this opposition, republicans were forced to set the tax cuts to expire at the end of 2010. as 2010 drew to a close president obama and many democrats in congress including myself supported extending the tax cuts for middle-class families but letting the lower rates on income above $200,000 for an individual and $250,000 for a family revert to the clinton-era levels, as was scheduled. senate republicans filibustered that effort refusing to allow the middle class tax cut without a tax cut for america's wealthiest. not wanting tax rates to go up on middle-class families still struggling during the economy. the president and senate democrats reluctantly agreed to extend all of the tax cuts through this year. which brings us to now. once again these tax rates are set to expire. i would like to keep rates low for middle-
george w. bush in september of 2008, the companies wouldn't have been able to pursue chapter 11 reorganization mr. wilson, mr. bloom, mr. feldman, is mr. rattner's this is that correct? do you agree that there simply were no other options available aside from complete liquidation on the path the was taken? >> we will start with you. smith it was our judgment, and i have no reason to question it coming and it was based on extensive talking in the market plus our own collective experience that if the government hadn't provided the financing that general motors went have been able and would have to liquidate. >> mr. feldman? >> i completely agree. we were in touch with the largest financial institutions in the world. they were not going to provide capital. we spoke to the largest funds in the world. they were talking about needing nine months to do diligence to make a determination as to whether they would make an investment. it was simply the u.s. government unfortunately was a lender of last resort, but it was the only lender in my view. >> that's correct. my written testimony th
in this country from the last two administrations, the george w. bush administration, the barack obama administration have warned as if in a single voice we're already facing the equivalent of a digital pearl harbor or 9/11 if we don't shore up and defend our exposed cyber flanks. same is true of the impact of our vulnerability in cyberspace to cyber theft. general keith alexander the head of the defense department cyber command and the national security agency made a speech a week or two ago in which he estimated that more than a trillion dollars has been stolen over cyberspace from america. he called it the largest transz every of -- transfer of wealth in history. that results from moving money at a bank -- out of bank accounts a lot of us never hear because the banks feel it's embarrassing, theft of industrial secrets to other countries that then build from those industrial secrets and create the jobs in their countries that our companies wanted to create here. so there's a unified position among national security leaders apart from which administration they served we need this legi
/ dirimitiga a a imatonhit qu a smr og esorti vith esid oe i think that during the george w. bush years there was an emphasis on combatin relious discrimination. d i y ba erf dimion, anti-arab, anti-muslim discrimination was a part of the. i think one of the things that we've seen with this ministration is shift into cod e mhay wee r gswo deal with. anso i would like to see more done. now, there is one thing that i thini was positive that has come out of the obama mitrn. es rtls21, h rslvt a isy qio t whether groups like jews several rights protection in univerty by e u. anidacisimio th sounds like discrimination. but if that you came in and said d ti-sitis t swoue e gh aer sse rio ha t i d udib] ayt us acting president obama should be credited with having done somethingositive on that >> thank you. adsihi aaem nogong with an american child born today happens to be a muslim or an arab, who wants growp d beco pde thasms hahahhutso ouofice.hea given the fact that 62% of americans have never met a muslim, and al this islaphia i thinkt'sre ffto prsi obato y iwe msi o ? i' an er. and our
in'st g o re cieen repo. heoio h argument that romney's foreign policy is just a return to george w. bush. osha's popularity has increased uptake of thereetlbt e obwirge ria. ssmempad sure world and he's made it more secure. and that romney is abdicating pretty much the same policies as orge.uh ftr tpa has inck,toq tus rcnd iee ore direct line of attk that was tried already was romney did make some statement saying that he didn't think shtod eor spenminsdos herz am sme huli pakistan, and after bin laden took place during the 2008 campaign. so obama will m ha tow ry ot h to. d tn y kete agen y some ways is trapped in the past, maybe making youth versus someona little bit olde eystatenat ui sohiaske al eoin fgnic tahm idi l ps. ar control agreement had a very strong bipartisan suport, foren cyabmeot of the rbn kifsurpsemn dow a cutry of interest with russia? of course not to our we rife to some degree? sure. are ups about russia's cric tncofe? nu oeol ? russia being in any, every turn to the cold war? i think most people might see that as eing somewhat out of rega.oneon th e t sh
ivela tohrhau n evhike.aon it's much more george h.w. bush than any other modern pesident. i n' li that s bm's. igetitigr g, ia dre isergtt ey n mi, ahead. >> first of all, the thank you, rachel for everything you do. i thk there weere [cs applause] >> that's very nice of you to sndi'otui wstvito t because nature and in a w minutes. >> i would like to say was drafted in 1968. al fdsamtryie teedthet. eay i was drafted. the question i hae is money is dostngutw ou camp pain. president obama i am told that $2 billionorisio thyoi hspire n'ok >> this year to repeal any differently about the idea at hover ny hdredof sponheta om knere?t tl the front page of "the boston globe" is how the likely nominee of the republican tde come in the pack that is qutnghims lo t onnsou oiznscore eleven when people are forced by the few elen rules we've got live od thut o oti coatelhe ny ra ak. aswo ith ns there's nobody trace it back to a country either. like if china had about preference betwe barack obama and mitt romney committee who wa th e ns t would be s sy. aur] if the fcc was in charge of an
as anthony kennedy appointed by president george h.w. bush wrote the opinion for the court and listen to what he said: a principal feature of the removal system is exercised by immigration officials. discretion is the enforcement of immigration law embracing human concerns, unauthorized workers trying to support their families, for example, likely pose less danger than alien smugglers or aliens who committed a serious crime, so said justice kennedy. the administration's policy isn't just legal. it's realistic and it's smart. today there are millions of undocumented immigrants in the united states. it is physically, literally impossible to deport them. so the department of homeland security has to decide priorities. should the highest priority be to deport those who are most dangerous to the united states? i think even the senator from iowa would have to concede that point. and the obama administration has made that their priority. senator grassley calls the administration's deportation policy -- quote -- "an amnesty." well, senator grassley, that's just not right. the dream act students will
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)